Falar, escrever e pensar sobre o anti-Mongo

Milton Friedman em "Price Theory", no capítulo I (Introduction) a coisa até começa bem:
.
“Economics is the science of how a particular society solves its economic problems. An economic problem exists whenever scarce means are used to satisfy alternative ends. If the means are not scarce, there is no problem at all; there is Nirvana. (Moi ici: Tanta gente viveu os últimos anos com esta crença… Nos transportes públicos, por exemplo, traduziu-se na indefenição de quem pretendem servir, quem são os clientes-alvo) If the means are scarce but there is only a single end, the problem of how to use the means is a technological problem. No value judgments enter into its solution; only knowledge of physical and technical relationships. For example, suppose given amounts of iron, labor, ere. are available and are to be used to build an engine of maximum horsepower. This is a purely technical problem that requires knowledge solely of engineering and of physical science. Alternatively, let the objective be to build the "best" engine, where the concept of .”best" involves not only horsepower, but also weight, size, etc. There is no longer a single end. No amount of purely physical and technical knowledge can yield a solution, since such knowledge cannot tell you how much power it is "worth" sacrificing to save a certain amount of weight. This is an economic problem, involving value judgments. (Moi ici: E quanto mais Mongo se entranha na nossa vida diária, mais julgamentos de valor se entranham na vida económica, julgamentos que não podem ser desenvolvidos por folhas de cálculo)
.
Depois, no capítulo 2 (Theory of Demand) a coisa começa a descambar:
.
“A demand curve of a particular group for a particular commodity can be defined as a locus of points, each of which shows the maximum quantity of the commodity that will be purchased by the group per unit time at a particular price.” 

.

Commodity para a frente, commodity para trás.

.

Razão tem Peter Johnson em "Astute Competition - The Economics of Strategic Diversity":

.

"Contemporary neoclassical economics does not provide an adequate account of the competition between diverse businesses..

...

Nowhere though do we encounter a business as the object of investigation in traditional economics. In other words, there is a huge gap in the economics coverage of commercial activity. Why is this? Part of the reason is that the focus of economists is on markets rather than on businesses.

...

Management and strategy seem to have little importance: notionally at least, we could optimise the production function with but a few hours of linear programming.

...

Such approaches, however, do not do justice to the rich, competitive creativity of successful businesses. It is not an accurate reflection of the centrality of businesses to the economy to regard them as fundamentally a remedy for imperfections in markets, or the result of human limitations or self-interested behaviour. Businesses have a much more positive purpose. They provide a powerful mechanism to harness resources in a compelling and efficient fashion. Businesses get things done, facilitating intent and action in a way that is fundamentally beyond the scope of the market mechanism. We can consider businesses to be the vehicle to extract economic rents through the competitive control of resources; they are the building blocks of heterogeneous competition."

.

Os membros da tríade que costumo referir aqui no blogue, há já alguns anos, falam e escrevem sobre mercados perfeitos em que todos os agentes são seres racionais que aspiram a maximizar o lucro, a utilidade, o valor, sem terem problemas de julgamentos de valor porque para eles tudo é uma "commodity". Eles falam, escrevem e pensam sobre um mundo que é o anti-Mongo.

.

Continua.